Supreme Court to Decide: Should Practical Experience Be Mandatory for Judicial Service Entry?
By Ganesh Mishra, Advocate, Supreme Court & Delhi High Court
Founder, Mishra & Associates
Contact: +91 9136273395 | advocateganeshmishra@gmail.com
www.advocateganeshmishra.in
107B, First Floor, Vikrant Enclave, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064
The Supreme Court of India is set to deliver a significant judgment on whether a minimum period of legal practice should be mandatory for entry into the judicial service at the Civil Judge (Junior Division) level. This comes after years of debate: while a practice requirement was removed in 2002 to attract fresh legal talent, many High Courts and members of the Bar now argue that practical experience is essential for judicial effectiveness.
Supporters of reinstating the practice requirement believe that real courtroom exposure is crucial for developing the skills and maturity needed on the bench. Critics, however, caution that such a rule could be fulfilled only in form, not substance, and may discourage talented graduates from pursuing a judicial career.
In my experience as an advocate in the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, practical experience undeniably shapes better judges. However, any rule must ensure genuine, meaningful exposure rather than a mere formality. If the Supreme Court restores the requirement, mechanisms for verifying actual practice must be established. If not, judicial training must be strengthened to bridge the gap.
The forthcoming verdict will have a lasting impact on the quality and character of India’s judiciary. The focus must remain on ensuring that new judges are both knowledgeable and practically equipped to deliver justice effectively.
Ganesh Mishra
Advocate, Supreme Court & Delhi High Court
Founder, Mishra & Associates
Comments
Post a Comment